<P><H1>Looping for Student Success</H1>
<P>[deck/abstract] Two years of intensive intervention with the same teacher allowed low-achieving students to catch up with their peers--and pass their high school exit exam. 
<P>By Sue Schaeffer and Julie A. Vitale


<P><H1>Looping for Student Success</H1>
<P>By Sue Schaeffer and Julie A. Vitale
<P>At Eleanor Roosevelt High School in Corona, CA, we have found it important to do things differently to create success for our struggling students. It was apparent that many incoming freshmen would not be likely to pass the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE)--and therefore would not earn diplomas--unless the staff created purposeful intervention that targeted their learning gaps. This was Roosevelt's major focus when we adjusted the master schedule to meet the needs of the lowest-performing incoming freshmen. 
<P>To address this concern, Roosevelt implemented a concept called "looping," in which one group of students stays with the same teacher for two or more years. The rationale was that if struggling students had the same teacher for two years, it would provide a seamless experience for their learning. The CAHSEE assesses students in math and language arts, and Roosevelt chose to focus on language arts because the standards are the same for grades 9 and 10 and because all regular-education English-only students take the same college-preparatory language arts class, which is not true for math. Once the school decided to focus on language arts, two tasks were essential to our success. The first task was to provide the students with an incredibly skilled teacher who would be able to identify their learning needs and address them. The second task was to provide the students with consistent instruction for two years without unnecessary reviews or remediation. We believed that with the focus on these areas, the struggling students would experience success. 
<P><B>Choosing a Teacher</B>
<P>This program required a teacher who had an extraordinarily positive attitude and the pedagogical skill necessary to meet the students at their current level of ability and to take them to grade level or beyond. Roosevelt's language arts department chair, Sue Schaeffer, was the first looping teacher. In addition to teaching the loopers, she also taught honors and advanced placement courses. Her enthusiasm level was high and the administration knew that she was the right person for the job. 
<P><B>Identifying the Students</B>
<P>The next step was to identify the students who would be in the looped class. We created a list of incoming ninth graders and their California Standards Test (CST) scores. Students are classified as performing at far below basic, below basic, basic, proficient, and advanced. We thought that looping would be most helpful for students who scored at the basic, below basic, and far below basic levels. 
<P>Roosevelt created two classes of 20 students each with plans to merge them into one class when they became sophomores. We wanted ninth grade to be a smaller class so the teacher would have the opportunity to assign and review the amount of writing necessary to achieve consistent and constant growth by working one-on-one with students. Students who were not identified as special education or English language learners (ELLs) and who had the lowest English Language Arts (ELA) California Standardized Test (CST) scores were given the 40 spots. The rationale for focusing on regular education and English-only students was that special education students and ELLs are provided with separate interventions to meet their immediate needs. The Corona area has a high transience rate, and of the 40 students who started out together, only 31 remained at our school over the course of the two years. Of those 31 students, 5 were performing far below basic, 15 below basic, and 11 basic as identified by their eighth-grade CST ELA scores. The goal was for these students to pass the CAHSEE in their sophomore year. 
<P>From the first day of class, the teacher talked with the students about why they were in the looping class: not because they were stupid or incapable of learning, but because they were missing skills. She let students know that their falling behind could be due to poor teaching, frequent absences, disinterest in learning, or other causes--but all of that was behind them; those were issues in the past. What was important was that they were capable of learning, she believed in them, and she hoped that, in time, they would learn to believe in themselves. She started slow, built success into the class daily, and continued to convince students that they could be successful.
<P><B>The Administrators' Role</B>
<P>The administrators' support was vital. The principal and other school leaders visited the class often to demonstrate their support and their high expectations for the students' progress. The administrators were explicit in their expectations with the students and their parents, who knew that the class was specifically designed to help them pass the CAHSEE.
<P>It was also important for the administrators to serve as a sounding board for the teacher to help solve problems, listen to and respond to her needs, and work with her on discipline issues that arose. Because she was already a highly skilled teacher, she did not need to attend trainings; what she really needed was moral support and to know that she was not in this intervention alone. 
<P><B>The First Year</B>
<P>The first year was difficult because the students had varied learning issues. The teacher used differentiated assessments to discover what skills the students had and began to fill in the gaps. She used daily grammar and comprehension lessons that dovetailed with larger lessons. Students wrote practice pieces daily and essays every few weeks. They learned to edit and respond to one another's essays and to rewrite their essays on the basis of the feedback. Many students did not complete their first essay assignment, but as they got used to this process, they wanted to be involved in responding to one another's essays--so they began to turn in their first drafts on time. As they became more successful in getting work in, they became more engaged in the class and began to apply more and more of the explicit lessons on organizing and writing effective essays. 
<P>The teacher also focused on reading strategies that could help students read both fiction and nonfiction and discover what was important in each text. This included teaching, modeling, and practicing specific note-taking, analyzing, and summarizing skills. At first, students did not read the text or complete their notes. However, as the teacher used the students' work in class for students to discuss and then share their ideas in whole-class discussions, they became more engaged and more successful in completing their work and applying new learning. After students had read one-third of their first novel and shared the quotes that they thought were most important in each day's reading, a student commented, "We're getting better at choosing quotes that are important, aren't we?" Using the same reading strategies until they mastered them, looking at what they were doing, and analyzing its effectiveness made students more aware of their learning and more invested in continuing the process.
<P><B>The Second Year</B>
<P>By the second year, the looping students were still behind their peers, but they had gained the confidence to be challenged even more--and to believe that they could achieve. Essays became more frequent and harder. Reading intervention became more intense--but was coupled with students beginning to enjoy reading, which meant they were reading more in their free time. Some students began talking about taking honors and AP classes. Others became more aware of their progress. Some still struggled. The students with the lowest reading skills were also placed into a reading intervention class, READ 180, taught by the same looping teacher. There, she could target the specific needs of individual students by using small group instruction, computer instruction, and individual reading. Students also wrote essays in this class, doubling the instruction and the growth they made in writing. 
<P><B>The Test</B>
<P>Two months before the CAHSEE date, the students completed a state field test CAHSEE essay. When their teacher saw their fearful reaction (moving slowly, looking frustrated, giving up), she asked the principal if she could be the one to proctor the real test. Students typically take their state tests in their homeroom classes, where they know the surroundings and are connected with the teacher, so they tend to do well. She hoped that they would do even better with their looping teacher, whom they had known for two years. The principal agreed to let the looping teacher give the test. So, in the next two months, students wrote various types of essays weekly, read and analyzed more short nonfiction pieces, and talked about how they would celebrate their accomplishments when they passed the CAHSEE. The teacher and principal both promised pizza. The students promised to do their best.
<P>On the day of the test, students worked hard. When they appeared nervous, the teacher encouraged them to keep going, to believe in themselves and what they were capable of doing. The test is not timed, so students were encouraged to take as long as they needed. They organized their essays, checked their answers, and took the test very seriously. When they debriefed the test later in class, most felt that they had passed. The teacher brought in pizza the next day to celebrate how hard they had worked. 
<P>Of the thirty-one students who took the test, twenty-seven passed. The other four had scores of 349, 347, 345, and 331 out of the 350 needed to pass. Of the four who did not pass, one had been originally identified as having a far below basic skill level, two as below basic, and one as basic. All of them went up one level each on their CST scores. The entire sophomore class at the school had an 86% passage rate. The looping class had an 87% passage rate. Needless to say, the principal also bought them pizza and celebrated with these students and their teacher.
<P><B>The Second, Third, and Fourth Cohorts</B>
<P>When the first class of loopers began tenth grade, Roosevelt opened another freshman class and recruited another teacher who had the pedagogical skills to work with struggling students. About eight weeks into the school year, it became apparent that she did not have the patience, motivation, belief, or desire to work with this special group of students. The administrators and the original looping teacher attempted to work with her and help keep her motivated, but she believed that the students had too many behavioral issues and should not be together. As a result, the class folded at the end of the ninth grade year and did not loop into tenth grade together. 
<P>However, because the first looping class was so successful, it was important to try again. So, we recruited a new teacher and she and her looping class are in their second year together; the students will take the CAHSEE in March 2010. This teacher has had similar issues with motivating the students and dealing with their behavior, but her motivation and tenacity are so intense she will not be swayed. The difference between her and the teacher of the unsuccessful second cohort comes down to expectations: the belief that all students are capable of achieving success and the teacher's ability to instill this belief into his or her students. 
<P>Roosevelt also started its fourth cohort of loopers in fall 2009. The teacher of the first cohort is back in action and feeling once again as if these students have a long way to go, but now she <I>knows</I> the difference that her steadfastness will make in the success of the lives of these students.  
<BR><BR><BR>
<P><B>Sue Schaeffer</B> <I>(sschaeffer@cnusd.k12.ca.us) is a teacher and language arts department chair at Eleanor Roosevelt High School in Corona, CA.</I> 
<P><B>Julie A. Vitale</B> <I>(jvitale@cnusd.k12.ca.us) is the principal of Eleanor Roosevelt High School in Corona, CA.</I> 
